The final warning of an Obama Presidency
prytoj
Posts: 536
Barack Obama speaking on the Chicago public radio station 91.5 FM, WBEZ, on the program “Odyssey” in 2001:
...But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the CONSTITUTIOTN AS A CHARTER OF NEGATIVE LIBERTIES. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted. And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which to BRING ABOUT REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
..Obama: Maybe I'm showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. Y'know, the institution just isn't structured that way.
...The court's just not very good at it, and politically it's very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So, I mean, I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally, y'know I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. .....
There's more. Listen for yourself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
An Obama Presidency is INSANE in the fn MEMBRANE
...But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the CONSTITUTIOTN AS A CHARTER OF NEGATIVE LIBERTIES. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted. And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which to BRING ABOUT REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
..Obama: Maybe I'm showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. Y'know, the institution just isn't structured that way.
...The court's just not very good at it, and politically it's very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So, I mean, I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally, y'know I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. .....
There's more. Listen for yourself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
An Obama Presidency is INSANE in the fn MEMBRANE
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
It appears to be slowly happening already but like the rest of us we'll have to deal with which ever candidate gets elected.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
http://www.drudgereport.com
It's starting to become pretty fun to go to Drudge in the morning these days. Usually, he tries to put up some hint of impartiality, but that's out the window. He seems to be wigging out, and it's great to see.
I'm not saying that people have to vote for Obama, because I definitely am not, but at least be educated and well informed and vote for or against a candidate based on fact and not some biased talking points.
These are the words of the man himself. I can't provide more irrefutable non-bias than that.
The man said these things, on tape, irrefutable proof.
I know what he said but take a look at the tax plan he is pushing. It is essentially the same tax plan pushed by Clinton in 1993. The man fucked up and used the redistribution of wealth line a few times but if you look past that and at his plan you would see that that is not the case. As I stated I don't like his plan and I don't like McCain's plan either but if you look at the two plans Obama's is better.
That's what kills me... the right wing radio nuts are saying that this will destroy our country, our economy, all of the small businesses, etc. It's a joke, but their listeners are convinced that it will happen.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I agree and I don';t understand why the Obama's camp just doesn't come out and say that his plan is similar to Clinton's in 1993 and under Clinton's tax plan our economy flourished, I know there where other contributing factors to that, and we had a budget surplus. Under Bush's tax plan, which is basically what McCain is touting, we had record deficit.
i don't think that quite captures it ...
that makes you psycho!
Edit: darm! aNiMaL beat me to it....
Second, his plans do promote movement towards socialism. I'm not saying that that is wrong at all. It's a political opinion. But, I am saying it's just a fact. He wants to redistribute wealth more so than our current "progressive" system. He also wants to increase regulation, increase taxes on the private sector. That grows government's relative size of the economy. Socialism grows out of capitalism. Here's it's exact definition...
Socialism - theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
If one can't agree that this is what he (and most Dems) are attempting to do, I don't know what to say. Is he a socialist? I don't know, it's simply a lablel... so who really cares. Is he promoting socialist ideals? YES!
I still don't get how giving tax cuts is a redistribution of wealth. Granted, they are disproportional in terms of income, but taxes have always been since our progressive tax system has been in place.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I'm sure nobody likes to be called something they are not.
I am not a republican and it would bother me to be called one.
Senator Obama is not a socialist so I'm sure it doesnt amuse him to be called one.
more than happy to be called a socialist ... but to answer your question: in america, people respond to labels and catch-phrases with liberal, socialist, flip-flopper, etc being example ... people are either too lazy or too something else to see and learn for themselves so they rely on news media, pundits, tv, and such to tell them what they want to hear ...
although obama may promote a plan that has socialist leanings - there is no way he can be called a socialist by any stretch ...
You would agree that this is not 1993, right? I mean the economic environment is completely different. We are in a much bigger economic downturn than what was experienced in early 90s. Moreover, we may not have a "mixed" congress like was the case in the 90s. It appears the Dems will have full control. Lastly, the 90s harbored the knowledge boom. Computers and the internet took off. This increased efficiency and boosted productivity.
So, the reason I'm scared. We are in a shit storm econonomic environment right now. IMHO, this is way worse then the typical "recession" like 92 or 01. And in this environment we are going to increase taxes on the entire private sector? And We are going to raise spending? On top of that, we don't have a new technology that is going to help us increase efficiency. I just don't think his plan is smart economic policy. But, we'll have four years to debate that.
I'm wondering if people who are calling Obama and his plans socialist have ever really met socialists or been to a country operating under a quasi-socialist government. Obama is far right compared to the modern socialist/extreme leftist. It's just the same basic inflammatory language that we never would've even heard if Obama and McCain were neck-in-neck in the polls.
Our system is progressive. And he wants to increase the "progression". Therefore, it redistributes MORE wealth from the wealth to the less fortunate. It is promoting redistribution of wealth. Why doesn't Obama just say, "yes it is. I don't have a problem with that." That would be really refreshing IMHO.
If you are promoting socialist ideals, you can't be called a socialist?
If I promote capitalist ideals, can I be called a capitalist? I think so, or I wouldnt' be promoting those ideals.
It wasn't a mixed Congress in the early 90s. Clinton worked under two full years with a Democratic House and Senate. It wasn't until January 95 that Republicans retained control.
So you started beating this drum before or after Sarah Palin started suggesting this at her rallies? :rolleyes:
Some people need to get a brain of their own around here....
In all, this is a fascinating conversation, IF people would calm down about how Obama is going to destroy the country, kill your children, make you convert to Islam (is he a Marxist/Communist or an Islamofascist? And, yes, those two are mutually exclusive), etc.
I am an Obama supporter, but more to the point, I'm fascinated with the history of American political movements. I also like to think about historical causality (the FDR-Reagan battle being an example; also, part of what we're dealing with in terms of foreign policy, is the fallout from the Great Wars in Europe in the first half of the last century; domestically, especially in my native south, we are dealing with the fallout of the Civil War: reconstruction, Jim Crow, and Civil Rights were all attempts to heal from the rupture of the Civil War and that attempt continues)
Anyway, just some random thoughts...
I sincerely doubt many, if any, conservative commentators or posters here were calling Obama a socialist before this past month.
That what republicans are hoping people miss, but they are very adament in stating that under the Bush Administration it is all the democrats fault because they have been in charge for the last 2 years... talk about hypocrisy...
The best possible solution would be to reduce spending significantly so that we can cut taxes across the board for all income levels, but since neither McCain or Obama are going to do that then what is the next best plan. We need to do something. Tax cuts are not the answer because we are already in the whole for trillions of dollars eventually this debt is going to drive up inflation and then that extra money we got to keep under McCain's plan will be worth less. Under Obama's plan we do run the risk that it may adversely effect small business, but that is not certain.
Here's the problem:
Fascism requires an autocratic or dictorial control. It doesn't make any sense that that is what the Republican party is seeking, especially when they overthrowing dictators and promoting democracy.
Meanwhile, Obama is promoting exactly what needs to occur in order to turn a country into a socialist state.
Why did the communist party of America support Obama?
Come on man. You can't help who throws there support behind you. The KKK endorsed Ron Paul, does that mean that Ron paul is a racist or a supporter of the KKK.